Understanding VAM and Student Learning Growth -Your Evaluation

Members have been asking CTA about Student Learning Growth and VAM. Below is some information:

DOE ORDER NO. 2021-E0-02

  • Rule 6A-5.0411, F.A.C., is suspended in part such that the three-year aggregate VAM scores will contain available teacher performance information from the 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2020-21 school years, meaning that the three year aggregate score will cover a four year span and will contain all available data during that time period. In order to provide maximum flexibility for use in the "performance of students" component of educator and administrator evaluations for districts that use this resource, single-year and two-year aggregate scores will also be calculated by the Department.
  • The rule only applies to the STATE calculated VAM. The rules does not apply to the District calculation.
  • The order does not waive the Student Learning Growth requirement for the evaluation.

What is Student Learning Growth?

  • SLG is one component of the final evaluation.
  • SLG is 33% of the final summative score.
  • Both FLDOE and OCPS use value-added models to calculate the SLG. The models are different. It is not the same calculation.
  • Both models are different.
  • Orange County Public School does not use FLDOE VAM calculation for teacher evaluations.
  • The models do not measure gains or proficiency.

What is the difference between FLDOE and OCPS calculation?

STATE

  • Use three years' worth of data.
  • Students must be in survey 2 or 3.
  • Currently, VAM scores are produced for teachers of the following grades and subjects:
    • English Language Arts (4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th)
    • Mathematics (4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th)
    • Algebra I (9th and 8th grades only)
    • The State VAM calculation IS NOT used in the teacher evaluations.

OCPS

  • Use one year worth of data.
  • Students must be in surveys 2 and 3.
  • OCPS calculation is used in the teacher evaluations.
  • OCPS can include characteristics (variables) into the calculation.

CONTRACT LANGUAGE:

Article X

F. Student Learning Growth Cut Scores

1. The student learning growth portion of the evaluation will be one-third of the final summative evaluation for all instructional employees. The instructional practices portion of the evaluation to include the deliberate practice element will constitute the other two-thirds of the final summative evaluation.

2. All instructional personnel will receive student learning growth scores through local student learning growth models. For these student learning growth scores, standard errors will be used along with the value-added score to ensure a higher degree of confidence in assigning rating categories. This method will be used for each assessment to determine course, school, district or any other growth scores. The rating categories will be collaboratively agreed upon and are set as follows:

a. Highly Effective: A highly effective rating is demonstrated by a value-added score of greater than zero (0), where all of the scores contained within the associated 99-
percent confidence interval also lie above zero (0).

b. Effective: An effective rating is demonstrated by a value-added score of zero (0); or a value-added score of greater than zero (0), where some portion of the range of scores associated with a 99-percent confidence interval lies at or below zero (0); or a value-added score of less than zero (0), where some portion of the range of scores associated with both the 95-percent and the 99-percent confidence interval lies at or above zero (0).

c. Needs Improvement or Developing if the teacher has been teaching for fewer than three (3) years: A needs improvement or developing rating is demonstrated by a value-added score that is less than zero (0), where the entire 95-percent confidence interval falls below zero (0), but where a portion of the 99-percent confidence interval lies above zero (0).
d. Unsatisfactory: An unsatisfactory rating is demonstrated by a value-added score of less than zero (0), where all of the scores contained within the 99-percent confidence interval also lie below zero (0).

3. When a particular assessment does not meet requirements for the calculation of a local student learning growth score, the results for the assessment shall be combined into the overall student learning growth score as “Effective.” Multiple pieces of student learning growth will be weighted based on the number of students included.

G. Evaluation Rating Ranges:

2. Student Learning Growth Score – The four evaluation ratings are specified as follows:

Highly Effective: 4.00

Effective: 3.29

Needs Improvement/Developing: 2.39

Unsatisfactory: 1.49